On Sun, 23 Aug 2015, Hadmut Danisch wrote:
astonished to see, what problems come with Maildir++ and how complicated
dovecot tries to deal with them.
..
[fast fwd to "solution"]
INBOX -> ~/mail/inbox
abc ->~/mail/abc
abc/def -> ~/mail/abc.dir/defor ~/mail/___abc___/def
Thi
On Fri, 11 Jul 2014, Iain Hallam wrote:
maildir: out-of-disk-space failures apparently cause all kinds of
problems, e.g. "Expunged message reappeared", "Duplicate file entry"?
Does anyone know what's happening with Dovecot here and how to recover
so that this user can see mail again?
Assumin
On Thu, 7 Jun 2012, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 06.06.2012 23:59, schrieb Ed W:
I'm not sure why this is so hard to believe. There is literally a class of
customers that have a specification
which says that there must be a notification sent back to the sender whenever
they download their emails
On Fri, 13 Apr 2012, Ed W wrote:
On 13/04/2012 13:33, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
What I meant wasn't the drive throwing uncorrectable read errors but
the drives are returning different data that each think is correct or
both may have sent the correct data but one of the set got corrupted
on the fly.
On Fri, 23 Mar 2012, Jeff Gustafson wrote:
That didn't seem to make much of a difference. On a 3.1GB backup it
shaved off 5 seconds. dsync's time was over 6 minutes with or without
the mail_fsync=never. rsync copied the same 3.1GB mailbox in 15 seconds.
It seems to me that dsync
On Tue, 28 Feb 2012, Thomas Leuxner wrote:
Am 28.02.2012 um 09:46 schrieb Thomas Leuxner:
Assuming this is the task you could also use:
$ doveadm expunge -u jane@example.org before 2012-02-01 unseen
Play around with the scope a bit before you actually run it:
$ doveadm search -u jane..
A couple years ago, I wrote some code for our Courier implementation
that sent a magic UDP packet to a small server each time a user modified
their voicemail IMAP folder. That UDP server would then connect back to
Courier via IMAP again and check whether the folder had any unread
messages left
On Mon, 19 Dec 2011, Cor Bosman wrote:
# OS: Linux 2.6.32.36-xsserver x86_64 Debian 6.0.3
Are you sure you didn't roll your own kernel? Debian kernels I know don't
use the ".36" suffix, but ship as 2.6.32-something and use their own
internal version numbering.
For example, I found this on
On Wed, 26 Oct 2011, Noel Butler wrote:
*sigh*
As usual Stanley, you do not contribute anything constructive, only
trollish jibberish
I don't know where both of you live, but can't you just grab a coffee and
find out what it is that makes a mockery of any discussion between the two
of you?
On Sat, 22 Oct 2011, Hadmut Danisch wrote:
Again, this discussion is nuts. If this is supposed to be some support
mailing list (as the dovecot web page suggests) people should take care
to focus on the question rather than taking a question as an opportunity
for telling their individual opinion
On Sat, 22 Oct 2011, Hadmut Danisch wrote:
I don't believe it does make much sense to ask technical questions if
this ends in silly discussions about whether an admin should do
something this or that way or how long logfiles should be kept. This is
not related to the technical question anymore
On Mon, 13 Jun 2011, Timo Sirainen wrote:
With v2.0 it was already limiting. It increased each login failure delay
to 15 seconds before the failure was reported. Although maybe something
wasn't working correctly, because 50k hits is more than I think should
have been possible. Assuming you have
For what it's worth..
I've seen the FETCH error with "got too little data" also with Maildir
setup. So, not only limited to mbox.
This was quite some time ago with (I think) 1.0.15. Back then, I just
removed the dovecot.index and cache files (leaving only the uidlist file)
for that maildir fol
Hi,
On Mon, 9 May 2011, Spyros Tsiolis wrote:
I checked all the hidden files underneath
maildir:/var/MailRoot/domains/%d/%n/Maildir
and coudn't find this specific folder.
Checking for specific emails could help.
On the other hand, having backups handy would be nice. That would not only
be h
On Mon, 17 Jan 2011, Steve wrote:
Von: Giles Coochey
That can depend on what you clasify as SPAM. Many, 'newsletters' which
you've been 'subscribed to' by negative option web-forms are considered
SPAM by some, and those may contain PDF attachments of 500kb+
Welll I wrote about "usual" a
On Mon, 17 Jan 2011, Steve wrote:
Spam does not bump the average mail size considerably. Average spam
mails is way smaller then average normal mails. The reason for this is
very simple: Spammers need to reach as many end users as possible. And
they need to get those mails out as fastest as po
Hi,
Since upgrading dovecot version (from somewhat ancient to 1.2.16), I see
messages in the logs like these:
Jan 15 00:55:17 srv0303 dovecot: POP3(obm03):
fchown(/home/obm/obm03/mail/.imap/INBOX/dovecot.index.tmp, -1, 8(mail)) failed:
Operation not permitted (egid=1033(obm), group based on
On Sun, 22 Nov 2009, Jerry wrote:
If you are using a version <2007 then upgrading should be seriously
considered. The "ODF" format in the 2010 version is supposedly more
compliant than that used in OpenOffice.
Rotflmao! You're not serious?? I think you are confusing the Microsoft
OpenXML form
On Sun, 22 Nov 2009, Charles Marcus wrote:
On 11/22/2009, Maarten Bezemer (mcbdove...@robuust.nl) wrote:
But at least now that I moved the Outlook.pst and
outlooku...@servername-02.pst to a samba share, it is useable.
Still puzzled as to why they decided to store those in de
LocalSettings
On Mon, 23 Nov 2009, vus...@test123.ru wrote:
Outlook is best email client. Even 2003. The only missing thing is
inability to do imap-search request directly to imap server.
I won't say Outlook is the worst email client I've ever seen, but we all
know that 'best' and 'Outlook' can only be in
On Sun, 22 Nov 2009, Jerry wrote:
Of course this only applies to Microsoft Office 2010, a BETA of
which is available at:
I am very happy to know that Microsft acknowledged at dawn of 2010
that the limitation of personal storage is pointless.
The original PST specifications were developed wh
On Fri, 13 Feb 2009, Charles Marcus wrote:
On 2/12/2009, Maarten Bezemer (mcbdove...@robuust.nl) wrote:
Strangest thing about this is that it only seems to happen when an
email is read first through webmail.
What were you using for webmail again?
Squirrelmail, using the same imap server
On Fri, 13 Feb 2009, Charles Marcus wrote:
On 2/12/2009, Maarten Bezemer (mcbdove...@robuust.nl) wrote:
I can see 1.1.9-1 in Experimental, but not even in Unstable yet. So
I'm not ready to try it on production machines.
I could never use a distro that required me to use outdated/
On Fri, 13 Feb 2009, Odhiambo Washington wrote:
I don't seem to understand what you imply at all. Are you trying to address
Timo, Dovecot Admins like us, or Microsoft?
AFAIK, Outlook works. At least 2003SP3 and 2007SP1 works here. Not sure what
is so broken about it, but you can ask M$ why.
re are any.. aside
from ditching Outlook of course :-P )
Regards,
Maarten Bezemer
On Thu, 12 Feb 2009, Scott Silva wrote:
I just found this;
http://pubs.logicalexpressions.com/pub0009/LPMArticle.asp?ID=736
I guess Outlook 2003 introduced a newer version of the PST files that has a
20GB (twenty GB ) limit, but they have to be created with 2003, and they are
not backward compa
On Thu, 12 Feb 2009, Scott Silva wrote:
on 2-12-2009 10:35 AM Maarten Bezemer spake the following:
Outlook DOES store some kind of cache of IMAP mail in a PST. And that
PST is always located in the Local Settings directory, regardless of
your system-wide default location of PSTs.
I don&#
On Thu, 12 Feb 2009, Scott Silva wrote:
Outlook does not store IMAP mail in its PST. PST's are only used for the local
storage. Outlook does not crash if your IMAP mail folders are larger than 2
GB, although its IMAP implementation is pretty bad.
Outlook DOES store some kind of cache of IMAP
Hi,
On Sat, 3 Jan 2009, mouss wrote:
did you try:
mb2md -R -s /path/to/your/pst/INBOX -d /path/to/Maildir
I did not, but did now, and it didn't work... As expected, it creates
empty folders with the right name, containing sub folders named 'mailbox'
with the contents of the original
Hi,
Let me start with wishing you all the best for this new year, and I hope
we'll see a lot of new features and not so much new bugs ;-)
I'm trying to convert a number of PSTs to maildir. Just plain drag&drop in
Outlook doesn't work (gives a very cryptic error message in a certain
folder, b
Hi,
On Fri, 3 Oct 2008, Ilo Lorusso wrote:
I think the question has been asked before ... but I need to be adviced on
what would be the best way to import microsoft PST's into Dovecot.. ?
Since you have some money to spend, I'd recommend aid4mail. You can play
around with the free trial vers
e listen
port (SO_REUSEADDR in this case, if I'm not mistaken). This may however
very well be a Linux-specific solution.
Regards,
Maarten Bezemer
Hi Jan,
On Tue, 4 Mar 2008, Jan van den Berg wrote:
> I noticed that when I connect with Outlook 2003; and I start reading new
> email some mails get marked (completely random) for deletion (,S -> ,ST)
> ??
Did you enable content filtering in Outlook? I've seen things like this
before, when Outl
33 matches
Mail list logo
